creating a culture of innovative entrepreneurship · ultimately, a culture of innovative...

CREATING A CULTURE OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP GÜNTER FALTIN

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS AND ECONOMY Fall 2001 123

CREATING A CULTUREOF

INNOVATIVE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Günter FaltinFreie Universität Berlin

ABSTRACT

Entrepreneurship has more to it than just self-employment and hard work; to tap its full potential one needs toput emphasis on the generation and development of ideas. Research on creativity suggests that all of us are ableto engage in this kind of creative activity. This essay presents techniques for, and examples of, generatingentrepreneurial ideas. Its goal is to show that in the present age, which is marked by rising levels of education,growing consumer sophistication and increasing opportunities for comparing values, ideas that are developedin harmony with society's values have good and growing chances for success in the marketplace. Ultimately, aculture of innovative entrepreneurship is envisioned, which is able to incorporate economic, artistic, and socialactivities as parts of one coherent spectrum of human creativity.

Key Words: business model, creativity, culture of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship education, ideacreation, idea development

ENTREPRENEURSHIP -- A PERSONAL PREFACE

I felt attracted to the field of economics quite early, having started to invest my pocket money in thestock market at the age of 14. My family and teachers disapproved, since at that time this wasregarded as an inappropriate and evil activity.

Naturally, I went on to study economics. To my surprise, the subject that I had experienced asbeing so exciting and breathtaking, at university turned out to be boring and meaningless. I finishedmy coursework quickly, completed a dissertation in order to savor university life a little longer, andsubsequently found myself being offered a lifetime tenured professorship at the age of 31. When Iaccepted the position, I promised myself to approach the subject in a markedly different way. In mymind enterpreneurship was clearly the most vibrant way to bring economics to life. But how to createa company? I went around deliberating over which business field offered good prospects. Duringvisits in developing countries like Tanzania and India, I was stunned to see how expensive productslike coffee, sugar, and tea were in



Germany, compared to the prices in the producing countries. In tea, especially, the difference washuge. With little knowledge until then about tea, I began crunching numbers and compared the resultswith products in other fields. It turned out that price competition was least evident in tea, as wasinnovativeness. I started in-depth analyses of the costs of trading tea. So that by rearranging almosteverything that had been standard in the tea business, I created a business idea that seemed crazy toeverybody else, but made sense in terms of costsaving: one variety of tea only, big packets only, "buyyour supply for a year." The company — looking like a joke in the beginning — made its way. It hasgrown to become the biggest mail-order tea company in Germany and the biggest buyer of Darjeelingtea in the world.

I am not saying this to praise my own company, but to make my message clear: It is amazinghow quickly you can conquer a well-established business segment with a good idea. It is a messagethat is underscored by many recent examples. Concentrate on the development of a goodentrepreneurial idea: it might well be the main foundation to your entrepreneurial success. This maybe surprising to you as it was surprising to me. It definitely is in stark contrast to the mainstream pointof view, which usually stresses the importance of management, marketing and financing capabilitiesas the major requirement to an entrepreneur´s success, rather than the quality of his or herentrepreneurial idea.

INTRODUCTION

Entrepreneurship is becoming an important part in political and educational programs in manycountries around the world. Emerging not only in the USA but also in Europe is the idea of an"enterprise culture". So far, the primary focus is on the emergence of more small-sized enterprises,fast growth firms with technology based businesses (European Commission FIT 2000, Gibb 2001a.Similar tendencies are being observed in transition economies (European Training Foundation 1996,Buck 2000). Recent reviews of what is being taught in the field of entrepreneurship in Europe andNorth America indicate that the emphasis is substantially on the business plan as the framework fororganizing knowledge. This core is supplemented by functional economic inputs, delivered bybusiness schools or economics faculties (Gibb 2001b). There is very little outreach into social sciencesand arts faculties.

Entrepreneurship is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. It also has a creative dimensionthat is in parts beyond economic-rationale discourse. The concerns of one academic disciplineregarding their standards of academic rigor and respectability must not lead to the curtailing of thisphenomenon. This paper attempts to steer the focus towards fields of entrepreneurship in which thecreative dimension plays a substantial role. It seems that the importance of intense work on an ideahas been subsumed by the dominance of the teachings of business knowledge. What is



necessary is to remove entrepreneurship from this narrow confine and the often close association withbusiness administration, a too narrow paradigm for entrepreneurship (Gibb 2001b).

On this basis, the factors of success regarding the launch of a new venture are discussed toassess the importance of idea creation and development in the interplay with the other factors (peopleand resources). In this regard, it can be shown that the need for innovativeness does not result onlyfrom intensifying competition but also, in a broader sense, includes social issues, so as to identify inadvance new tendencies in the market place.

Recent findings on the subject of creativity (Goleman, Kaufman and Ray 1993,Csikszentmihalyi 1999) combined with the findings of Vesper (1993) that successful business ideasusually are a natural outgrowth of an individual's background open up a perspective with a far greaterrange, thereby setting free the potentials for the development of successful entrepreneurial ideas. Anattempt is being made to detect patterns and to set examples which could facilitate a systematicworking out and processing of idea development, as an integral and substantial part of the businessmodel. In addition to this perspective, it will be shown that adapting to societal values and sharedproblems is an increasingly essential factor in the successful launching of an enterprise.

The attempt undertaken is to analyze the interplay of all these factors in their impact on theconditions for a more open, more accessible and more widespread culture of entrepreneurship.

UNDERSTANDING INNOVATIVE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Let us take a closer look at how the figure of the entrepreneur is treated in economic theory. Untilquite recently, the entrepreneur was largely left out of the literature of economics. ”Entrepreneurshipis an important and, until recently, sadly neglected subject,” according to Mark Casson (1990 XIII),who could be called the rediscoverer of the entrepreneurial figure.

Over the last few years, research has taken a new direction, bringing out the separate anddistinct function of the entrepreneur in contrast to that of the manager. The manager, one could argue,must operate under normal conditions and in routine business functions, while exactly the oppositequalities are needed for successful entrepreneurship. Here, you have to emphasize the innovativemomentum and a fresh start, in contrast to the organizational aspects of existing entities.

Schumpeter describes the entrepreneur as forsaking well-trodden paths to open up newterritory and as turning (believe it or not!) dreams into reality (op. cit., 125 f.). The entrepreneurialfunction consists not of inventing things, but rather of bringing knowledge to life and into the market(op. cit. 128 f.). Schumpeter saw the markets,



realistically viewed, as dominated by oligopolies. Competition, and with it a more efficient allocationof resources, arises only through the invasion of these markets by new entrepreneurs, who destroy theexisting market equilibrium with their innovations. This mechanism has been taken into economicdiscourse by the term ”creative destruction.”

Hans Hinterhuber (1992) points out a special relationship between the entrepreneurial visionand the person: entrepreneurial ideas, he says, are an expression of one’s own life and professionalexperience. He even speaks of the ”feeling of a mission.” This sense of mission must be present to setfree the energies needed to market a product successfully. The author gives several examples ofentrepreneurial ideas that have marked our society more than others, because their originators had ”anidea in the Platonic sense” and were imbued with a sense of mission: Gottlieb Duttweiler inSwitzerland, with his idea of breaking down traditional commercial structures and offering productsmuch cheaper, especially to poorer population groups; or Steven Jobs and Stephen Wozniak, withtheir vision of democratising the computer. Interesting, too, is the notion that entrepreneurial visionoften comes with ”an idea of sweeping, classic simplicity” (op. cit. 44).

This is in contrast to economic textbook theory which usually assumes that profits make upthe motivation in the field of business. “The essence of entrepreneurship is being different”, saysCasson (op. cit.). And, as Richard Olsen, the Swiss founder of a research institute for appliedeconomics, adds: “If your main motivation is money, you will not have the perseverance that youneed to create a successful entrepreneurial venture.”Entrepreneurship - says Timmons (1994) - means the ability to set up and build something out ofpractically nothing; it is therefore an elementarily human, creative act. In this regard, it should bemade clear that an entire area of entrepreneurship has always given and continues to give great weightto the creative aspect of developing an entrepreneurial idea.

A reason why the importance of the quality of the entrepreneurial idea has been so littleregarded is that in politics, but partly also in scientific literature entrepreneurship is closely equatedwith self-employment – which in real life is regularly based on business ideas that are not particularlynew or innovative. To open a fashion boutique, restaurant or a copy shop improves unemploymentstatistics and is an important and courageous step in societies where self-employment is still a greatexception. However, they are not especially promising, as evidenced by their high failure rates.

In Germany the term for self-employed, selbstständig, which is often applied to the smallshop owner, means literally “standing on your own” or “independent,” but it also has a humorous (andquite popular) connotation: you have to do it all yourself (selbst) and you have to do it all the time(ständig). This, obviously, is not an attractive



prospect. But, lacking an innovative idea, it is all too often a reality.

APPLY DIVISION OF LABOR PRINCIPLES TO ENTREPRENEURSHIP

It seems that the reality of self-employment even translates into a description of knowledgerequirements for entrepreneurship. The traditional concept of an entrepreneur's qualification is thats/he has to know almost everything: accounting, keeping inventory on hand, negotiating withsuppliers and customers, legalities, the taxman's demands, managing employees, equipmentmaintenance, creating team spirit, and so on. One could tally up an almost endless list of suchqualifications and competencies required of an entrepreneur. Not only is such a universally qualifiedperson hard to find, and difficult to create from training, but such demands also deter ordinary people.It is certainly helpful for entrepreneurs to have basic know-how and understanding of the subjectsmentioned. But to what extent is it necessary for the entrepreneur to have all these competencies fullydeveloped in his or her own person?We should be aware that in future the concept of an all-round qualification will become obsolete. Wemost certainly will have to apply the principle of division of labor to this problem much morestringently. People have different skills, attitudes and preferences. For example, instead of trying toteach an engineer how to become a smart salesperson (which is very much against his professionaland personal attributes) it seems better to separate these two functions and allocate them to twodifferent persons. There are too many business techniques to be learned. To handle each of themadequately would be simply overwhelming. It eats up too much of the time and energy that couldotherwise be devoted to leadership and vision. If you get down to earth, you get stuck. You must tryto keep flying! A compelling idea keeps you flying.Perhaps we should imagine the entrepreneur as a movie director: s/he is the brains that brings thedifferent actors, props and services all into play. This is already more than a full-time job for oneperson to manage alone. It goes along with the idea articulated in entrepreneurial studies, that start-ups need a "lead entrepreneur" supported by a "management team" (Timmons 1994, Bygrave 1994).

Applying the principles of division of labor could ultimately lead to a new relationshipbetween innovative entrepreneurship and business administration. Imagine the entrepreneur standingvis-à-vis a company. How would they come to an agreement on working together? The entrepreneurmight suggest, "If you employ me, I am willing to put my business ideas into practice for the benefitof your company." This is an attractive offer for a company that lacks innovativeness. The deal is alsoattractive for the entrepreneur: s/he does not need to get involved him/herself with the burden ofestablishing and doing the day-to-day running of the business. It is a novel approach and it will beinteresting to see how mutual benefits can be negotiated in such a deal.



(This approach would induce a profound change in the educational goals and the mindset ofjob seekers, as well. Normally, what they have to offer is their educational degree or certification, andthey must wait for an employer to take them up on it. Were they to offer an entrepreneurial idea, theirbargaining power and chances would improve instantly).

SUCCESS FACTORS TO NEW VENTURE CREATION

Taking the Timmons model (1994) - which can be regarded as the standard (Bygrave 1994, 10-11,Ripsas 1997) – as a basic, one can summarize the critical factors in three main groups:

- The people(the founders, including the management team as well)

- The idea(as developed and refined concept in order to exploit market opportunities)

- The resources(which are important for the setting up of the business and making it grow)

All three factors play an important role. One can certainly argue over what emphasis to placeon the individual factors. Venture capitalists would incline to allot the greatest influence to thepersonality of the founder(s). Those who teach business administration and also those who deal withthe typical problems of small scale enterprises will incline to place marketing, management skills andsufficient financing in the fore - not least with the good argument that these areas have been wellresearched and developed and that there are proven formulas to deal with these problems successfullyin practice.

In contrast to this the effect and function of innovative ideas have received scant examination.The thought that the quality of the idea could make a difference in the successful launching of a newventure is not particularly popular with managers or bankers. "There are plenty of ideas around", it isoften said, "the important part is to put them into practice". Isn't that reflecting reality quite well? Infact, there are lots of ideas in the sense of impressions and thoughts, that come to your mind. Butgenerating a new and innovative idea (even if not in Schumpeter's dimension of innovation) is atotally different operation. These types of ideas or concepts are not easily available.

Even if we cannot agree where to put the main emphasis, there is one striking consideration athand: the factors mentioned are interdependent, in the sense that strengths in one area can compensatefor weaknesses in other areas. Hence another valid point is: very good solutions in one area can leadto partial solutions in other



areas or can reduce the demands coming from other fields significantly. For instance, the enormouseconomic advantages which the idea of the tea campaign enabled us to offer such a favourable pricethat we could request our customers to advance us check payments, which, in turn, virtuallyeliminated the problem of financing.

When we look at the economic fate of many of the newly founded dot.com-companies, howcan we explain their failures? They were provided with management competencies and capital to anextent rarely seen before. It makes for a strong argument – agreed to by most analysts – that it was thelack of idea development, that the business model was not worked through or refined enough.

If your idea is not innovative, those businesses already in the market place will have acompetitive edge over you. They are the ones who already have customers, they have the experiencewith suppliers, and they know the specifics of the product itself, they are well-known in theirenvironment, whereas you, as a newcomer, are not. In short, they have all the advantages, and youhave a corresponding number of disadvantages. Hence, to enter the market place, it is almost anecessity to have a new idea. Most probably the innovative element of your business idea is your mostcrucial partner for survival.

Whether you successfully conquer the market or have to fight for mere survival depends verymuch on the quality of the concept that you have developed and refined. As it is an arduous process tofound a company, it would be a pity to build the whole edifice on a weak foundation.

However there is a need for innovations in a much broader sense. Sweeping new ideas do not,as a rule, arise from workaday business life and within the context of rational economic thinking.Such ideas often draw vibrant inputs from proximity to unconventional thinkers, socially involvedpeople, ecologically engaged people, or artists. These people can contribute their ways of thinking andpossibilities from their fields of interest to ideas for the improvement of the quality of life. It takes abroad range of people to respond to existing problems with social, economic and artistic imagination.The history of successful entrepreneurs offers numerous examples for this openness, much like thehistory of the economic sciences themselves which got essential impulses from people and viewpointsoutside of its own discipline.

DE-MYSTIFY CREATIVITY

Many start-ups base their business ideas on imitation or arbitrage. Even if the imitation does notinfringe on patent rights or trademarks, there are substantial disadvantages. By imitating, it is you whoarrives second (or even further down) in the marketplace, and there may be many others to come. Cut-throat competition is commonly the result. Of course, the temptations to imitate are obvious;imitations save costs for research and development and offer the safety of using a proven,



successful idea as a model. But beware: you may face a backlash of public opinion against you.Imitation, akin to stealing, may be popular if you are the underdog, but it often carries a bad tastewith it. Most often, the whole operation amounts to a gambling of sorts in the short term: weighingthe cost of your investment against the chances for a temporary return. Arbitrage - making use ofdifferent prices at different locations or times - has similar implications. Like you, others will spot theopportunity, but may have deeper pockets and/or lower costs than you; entry costs into the market arelow thereby attracting many players; by the time you are fully established and operational and havesecured customers, the price advantages might have become smaller or may have disappearedaltogether. The way out is trying to create something that is not open to competition on such a scale.

Vesper (1993) did research on the life of about one hundred successful entrepreneurs to findout what they all have in common. What he found was that the development of entrepreneurial ideasis different from what is commonly perceived. New venture ideas, he says, are usually a naturaloutgrowth of an individual´s education, work experience and hobbies. This is an important point,because it stresses that successful ideas relate back to oneself, one’s background, education, work orleisure activities. In conclusion, Vesper points out that most entrepreneurs succeed by pursuing ideasthat are not only good business opportunities but also relate directly to their personal criteria andvalues. These findings are very significant because they challenge the common view that first of allwe have to study market needs. That would be important for business administration, but notnecessarily for creating an innovative entrepreneurial idea. Vesper´s reasoning suggests that yourindividual background is the point to begin with. It is like in art. If you start by looking at marketneeds and sales, you will never become an artist with a genuine style.

Popular advice for would-be entrepreneurs, Vesper continues, all too often suggests that ideasarise largely through a mysterious combination of day dreaming and inspiration. But from hisresearch, Vesper draws a different conclusion:

Idea creation can be approached deliberately and systematically.This is a kind of revolution. The promise that you can deliberately and systematically create ideas isin complete contrast to the still prevailing belief that only extraordinary people have convincing newideas. Vesper’s research suggests that it is within the reach of almost everybody to create a genuineidea.

Although it is commonly believed that creativity is something rare and outstanding, modernresearch data on creativity in general do not substantiate such an assertion. Goleman, Kaufman andRay (1993), Csikszentmihalyi (1999) have demonstrated how creativity is accessible to each of us.There are a number of rules that can be learned by almost anybody. One need not be a genius to createa good idea that works. One of the researchers’ suggestions is: keep a prepared mind, let the



solution to a problem grow with time.These observations go along well with the findings of Goebel (1990), who describes a group

of about fifty successful entrepreneurs from Germany. The only characteristic shared by all was theirpersistent reassessment of a problem.

CASTING THE NET FARTHER

This chapter deals with two dimensions of innovation that relate to the notion of a broad basedenterprise culture:

- creating entrepreneurial ideas systematically- opening up entrepreneurship to social groups which had previously been excluded

Techniques for the Creation of an Innovative Entrepreneurial IdeaI have long suspected that it must be possible to open a venue for the systematic generation andrefining of ideas . The following list, rough and sketchy as it is, is an attempt to define certaincharacteristics that successful business ideas have in common. It is the attempt to recognize thepattern and to bring to the fore the commonality of various relevant to idea development.

"Discovering Something Existing"One of the most accurate descriptions - by Joseph Kirzner – shows how quite a few entrepreneurialideas are found. Discover something that exists already? This sounds like a paradox. How can onediscover something if it already exists? To “discover,” in this context, means to see a new potential insomething which is already known.A famous example of this is the telefax. The invention has existed for a long time, and it has beensuccessfully introduced worldwide by firms altogether different from those who invented it and thosewho first tried to market it.

"Functions, not Conventions"This is a pattern that comes close to Schumpeter's description of the enterpreneur as an innovator ofnew products or processes. The instruction reads thus: forget the convention; strictly analyse thefunction. There is always a more or less conventional way of doing things. It is not necessarily thebest way to do it. New technology or new materials may be available. Needs may have changed.

Take the example of the Berlin Tea Campaign:

In the beginning, it was only a thought, a vision that it might be possible to organise teatrading in a completely different way and to offer high quality at a lower price. I choose theexample of the Tea Campaign as I launched it myself.



The formation of the idea for the Tea Campaign, too, is like a puzzle, which took years to puttogether. The starting point: producing-country prices for coffee, tea, cocoa, bananas or sugar areabout one tenth of the prices in Central Europe. Why? Because of the costs for freight and insurance?It turned out that the expense lay neither in freight nor insurance but rather in the packaging materialfor the small quantities that are usual in German tea retailing, and in the high costs of distribution. Sowhy not reduce packaging cost by using bigger packages and finding a simple distribution channel?Slowly the puzzle takes shape.

What about preserving the quality of the tea? This is important if a consumer is to switchfrom buying small to large quantities. The experts say that tea keeps well for two to three years. Evenif it kept well for only one year, this would allow the customers to purchase supplies for one year.Then one could sell in bulk, and the customers could reap big price advantages from cutting down onpackaging costs. But what about the variety of brands? Can you reduce it? If a choice of many brandscauses a lot of costs and makes distribution expensive, why not just sell one brand? And with a bigenough order, doesn’t it make economic sense to buy at source, circumventing the middleman?

Can consumers be persuaded to choose only one brand of tea out of 140 and to drink the samebrand for an entire year? For a moment it looks as if the idea has failed just because of that. Ifcustomers are used to choosing between many brands, why should they restrict themselves? After along break to think things over, optimism returns. It's probably better to restrict drastically the numberof brand. If the purchase price of the tea is only of secondary significance (because it is relativelylow), then you can reach for a very high quality of tea. You can even take the best tea in the world!(The experts agree that it grows on the southern slopes of the Himalayas in a district calledDarjeeling.) If consumers can get such an excellent tea at a good price, they will probably not feel badabout having such a limited choice. The puzzle is completed.

From the beginning the entrepreneurial challenge facing the Tea Campaign was whetherbuyers could be convinced to buy one year's supply in large packages, and to give up the convenienceof small packages in exchange for substantial savings in price. Contrary to conventional marketingpractices, we hoped it would be possible somehow to "teach" the consumers to get used to a newconcept which would ultimately bring them considerable advantages. The central point of thisentrepreneurial idea was that success could be achieved by combining a new simplicity withpersuasive economics.

A unique case? I don't think so. Remember Goebel (1990), who found that the entrepreneurshe surveyed had one thing in common: taking an idea and working on it to the point where "normal"people would think that they were odd, and then developing this idea until it was mature.



Gottlieb Duttweiler, the founder of the “Migros” retail chain in Switzerland, or AnitaRoddick, the founder of "The Bodyshop," could be cited as similar examples. Both of them didn'tbelong to the business establishment; they were outsiders and started out on unfavourable terms.Breaking radically with conventions and developing contemporary, rational procedures with clearlyrecognisable advantages for the consumer were their recipe for success.

"Combining Anew"A person who recognizes social problems, addresses them and wants to do something practical tocounter them, is something of an artist. As in art, innovative achievement not infrequently requiresbeing obsessed by an idea. Courage and tenacity are required to launch new ideas, and ultimatesuccess is rarely achieved without them. Of decisive importance here is the quality of theentrepreneurial idea. Whether one makes a breakthrough in the market or just barely manages to standone’s ground (and is forced to use knees, elbows and the whole bag of little tricks and swindles)depends heavily on the quality of the concept with which one enters competition.

”Think ceramic,” says Thijs Nel, author, painter and potter in Magliesberg, nearJohannesburg. An idea occurred to him, as a potter, concerning how better houses could be built (cf.The Nation, Aug. 7, 1995). The inhabitants of the townships traditionally constructed their housesfrom clay, with walls reinforced by sticks and twigs. The problem with this is that termites come,devour the wood and leave behind fine water-conducting canals , with the result that the houses canno longer stand up to rainy weather.

Nel’s entrepreneurial idea was roughly this: think of a cup. Turn it upside down. Let it growever larger before your eyes and imagine holes in it. Now call the cup a house! This house-sized cupwith holes for windows must now be fired, like other pottery, with a flame that produces a hightemperature. You can organise the fire as a village festival. The result is a house far more durable thanthe previous huts, but hardly more expensive. Here is the artist as architect and entrepreneur,demonstrating an astonishingly simple and practical idea. Everyone is his or her own house-builder,potter, and artist. It might even occur that settlements constructed like this are more attractive inappearance than those designed by professional architects.

"(Re)integrating Functions"Integrating functions is similar. You know very well that you have your own, separate institution foreverything. You have shopping malls, churches, restaurants, youth clubs, senior centres, etc..Everything has its own function. So this is very simple: if you can use the equipment for a secondpurpose or a third purpose, you immediately save a lot of expenses. In fact, if you look into nature,you will find that nothing in it ever has a singular function only. Nature has always had a variety offunctions for any



one particular thing.

"Taking a Problem and Turning it into a Business Opportunity"Problems are an obvious source of entrepreneurial opportunities. Where others only see the problem,an entrepreneur may be challenged to search for an answer. Experience tells us the solution doesn´tnecessarily have to be sought head-on, particularly if mainstream people have looked at it already.Quite often the solution lies somewhere else.

Take the problem of the water hyacinth. This plant proliferates in rivers and lakes in tropicalcountries, reproducing rapidly and clogging the water. Much thought has been put into the question ofhow water hyacinths could be put to some profitable use. Theoretically usable as pig fodder orcompost, the plant, because it consists of 98% water and a few tough fibers, turned out to beuneconomical for these and most other applications. The research studies in this matter can fill athick binder while yielding no practical results.

A designer was impressed by the silken sheen taken on by the plant’s stems when put througha press, and she processed some. Artfully woven onto a rattan frame, the dried stems can be made intoarmchairs -- not just any armchairs, but very attractive and sturdy ones. For designers, this is aninteresting variation from other materials. What is this supposed to mean for an economist? Not much,if she or he asks the conventional questions in this field: is there a growth market here? No. Is there amarket niche here that one could fill with little competition? Probably not.

It is right at this point that the entrepreneur prevails over the conventional economist: throughrecognition of a potential in something that already exists, even though it doesn’t fit any typicaleconomic patterns. Water hyacinths? No potential; an often studied subject with no particular result.An armchair? The furniture market is saturated. The fact that the armchair was noticed at all wasalmost an accident. The handsome piece was created in the studio of the Thai designer Khun Tuk.Neither part alone, the water hyacinth nor the armchair, suggested anything promising. Put the twotogether, and they become thought-provoking: a nuisance weed suddenly becomes a raw material withinexhaustible potential. Turning water hyacinths into furniture has meanwhile become a big businessin Thailand.

"Reorganising Work into Fun"Do you remember Mark Twain's Tom Sawyer, who was ordered to paint his aunt's fence on Saturdayafternoon, the most precious time of the week? Tom divides the work into little pieces so that itbecomes an excitement to try it out: his friends eagerly form a queue to be allowed to paint a piece ofthe fence, and they even pay for it. In the end, the fence is painted; Tom has not worked a lick, hasenjoyed the company of his friends, and has even made money.



This story fascinated me early on, as it embodies an approach to work that is not mere utopianfantasy. There are certain types of work in certain situations where you can reorganise work alongTom's approach. What defines work as laborious and boring often depends on the circumstances. Tomilk a cow certainly is work for the farmer, but it may be fun and excitement for a tourist. Repetitionand skill requirements are Tom's enemies, but imagination and curiosity are his friends.

"Bringing Visions to Life"This particular approach is remarkably similar to art. Just like an artist who wants to establish his orher own style, an entrepreneur who wants to carry through a new idea often has to endure a phase ofrejection by society. We are familiar with such chapters in the biographies of famous artists as well asin the lives of famous first-generation entrepreneurs. Associated with personal sacrifice, foolishexperiments, and the pitying smiles of the establishment, this phase nevertheless constitutes the allureand the challenge in the life of the artist as well as of the entrepreneur. As a rule, most people will notachieve success without such shaky starts, where new frameworks have to be envisioned and greatdemands on courage and staying power are made.

In his study about famous American entrepreneurs, Hansen (1992) relates the following story.A young man tries to carry out an idea; for eighteen years, he goes without success. He has the visionof a horse carriage propelled by gasoline combustion (the first motors have just been developed) andcontrolled by mechanical linkages. A brave and daring vision shared by few others of his time. Hisfather thinks he is crazy and on the wrong track. When the vehicle is ready to be driven for the firsttime, the father refuses to get in because he doesn’t want to risk his life. The son piles failure on top offailure. At last a car built by him wins an auto race, only because, sturdier than those of hiscompetitors, it actually reaches the finish line. The man is called Henry Ford. His story is instructive,because he is indeed considered the prototype of the great capitalist, behind whose later successes thefragility of beginnings, the nurturing of ideas, the persistency and obsessiveness of the outsider alltend to disappear.

The techniques mentioned so far are like tools, helping to deal with pieces of a puzzle thatallow many more solutions than just one. Systematic idea development and refinement are rarely everfound in the syllabus of entrepreneurship education. It is the widespread assumption that the founder"brings in" his/her idea. This idea is then "processed" with an eye on the business plan. The tools forthis processing are the business knowledge and contents. But no matter how important these contentsare, the opportunities inherent in the intensive reworking of the initial idea as such will not besufficiently examined.

My own experience with entrepreneurs-to-be is that what they regard as an entrepreneurialidea is something like a raw idea - far from anything one would call a



mature, refined entrepreneurial concept. Usually their idea is not thoroughly thought out orresearched. Connecting links, analogies, cross associations have not been tried against it - in short, thepotential to generate a powerful idea is not realised. Quite often, you can find an attitude which Iwould call "fixation on a first idea." Like falling in love or down a trapdoor, this fixation is somethingthe person is unable to let go of. The fixation phenomenon was similarly experienced in the advisorywork at the Berlin Institute of Entrepreneurship. On top of this is the fear that the idea could be stolen,leading to secretive behavior and reluctancy towards disclosing and discussing the idea.It is helpful to explain these phenomena to one’s audience or clientele and deliberate on it together. Inmy own workshops, called “entrepreneurship laboratories,” I offer the advisee an agreement of sorts.We discuss the initial idea, but the one who has brought it in continues to be its owner. Under thisagreement, the owner gets the idea enhanced and enriched, while the fear that the idea could be stolenis mitigated.

After the entrepreneurial idea has passed the explorative phases, has got an innovative coreand has proved – theoretically – to provide a competitive edge, the next step has to be idea refinement.While idea development is a process of "opening up" to new horizons and contents, idea refinement isa process of focussing, of going into details. Without opening up, we will not get an innovative part inour business idea; without refining, we will not get the idea to run smoothly in real life.

Synergies can be an important aspect of idea refinement. (Is there anything that can be usedsimultaneously that someone else also uses or needs?) Anticipate your market-entry. Refine yourstrategy to counter possible imitators of your idea. (How can you make sure, for example, that it isyou who is be regarded as the genuine authority and will remain to be perceived as such, even withmore resourceful competitors coming on stage.) (For more details see Faltin 1999.)

With a well thought-out and exceptional concept certain problems regarding financing andmarketing can be resolved more easily : the financing of the tea campaign caused hardly anyproblems, as we were in a position to request our mail-order customers to make advance payment.And our marketing, due to the unusual nature of the idea, was taken care of by the editorial coverageof the media.

Adapting to Societal Values and Shared ProblemsOf course we cannot impose a set of values on entrepreneurship. But we should be aware that it isvalues which motivate, and it is a value system that creates culture and cohesion in society. Bycreating a culture of entrepreneurship, by opening up the field for more groups in society that are nottraditionally linked to business, we can expect a new influx of values, of new patterns of problemsolving, of new ideas being put into entrepreneurship, a new quality of participation in the economicsphere. Entrepreneurs would be in good company and on central stage. Max Weber has described thisphenomenon most strikingly. "For Weber the main motivating



factor for the entrepreneur was religious belief or the Protestant work ethic which established socialnorms that discouraged extravagance, conspicuous consumption and indolence. The result was higherproductivity, increased savings, and investment" (Kolshorn/Tomecko 1995, p.3). At a time when webecome increasingly aware of the diminishing cohesion in modern society, it seems not too far-fetched to predict a comeback of values.

Directing more attention to values will provide an incentive for those people who are notattracted primarily by the prospect of quick money, by greed, or by extreme ambition; these arepeople who want to keep their independence and their individuality even if that means a relatively lowincome. They want to do something good, and their ambitions have a new quality: they want to turntheir lives into a “spannendes Lebenskunstwerk,” a forever fascinating and inspiring work of the art ofliving (Horx, 1999, 240). This is important to note because many institutions and consultancies thatare in the business of promoting entrepreneurship stick to a conservative and conventional view: thatyou have to sacrifice much of your life and work around the clock. I’m not saying that such virtuesdon´t make sense. You do find many examples of this kind: entrepreneurs who work more than 16hours a day and offer up their relationships and hobbies on the altar of their venture. But you will alsofind a new type of entrepreneurs who manage to integrate entrepreneurship with their individualvalues: a person who is not prepared to sacrifice his/her lifestyle, who wants to live with a partner andhave children or who doesn't necessarily want to be in charge of a large number of employees (op.cit., 241). These observations no longer carry the notion of the entrepreneur as a heroic figure.

Fortunately, the field of entrepreneurial ideas is open for such dimensions of innovativeness:Entrepreneurial ideas can be woven into the fabric of societal values and shared problems.Indifference to social problems scares the public, undermines confidence, and almost always backfires(Morgan 1991, 292). One can recognize and integrate the contextual values and shared problems ofthe society in which one lives. In all likelihood, these ingredients will actually enhance the chance ofsuccess1 .

Our societies are marked by rising levels of education, growing sophistication of consumersregarding their choices, and fast and inexpensive tools concerning product and value-for-moneycomparisons. There is also increasing awareness of companies' business conduct. These developmentslead to new conditions for success in the market place. "Ethic pays" is not an idealistic assumptionany more. There is even a

1 The image of founders and start-ups in society differs considerably between countries (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor2000, Hay 2000). If entrepreneurial ideas are more in tune with societal values and shared problems in their respectivecountries, this should enhance the image of the entrepreneur as well as of entrepreneurship.



need for moral positioning as an integral part of companies' strategies (Horx 2001, 117). As anentrepreneur, being in tune with your customers' values and norms will create sympathy towards youand your product; the media may report favorably about your new venture, and articles written aboutyour idea are much better publicity than flashy and expensive advertising.

These aspects should supplement the concept of opportunity recognition, particularly if wewant to cast the net wider and attract more people to innovative entrepreneurship. Talking about hisexperience as an advisor for entrepreneurs-to-be, Bygrave (1994) describes how his clients are oftenobsessed with trying to create an outstanding, unique idea that only they possess. Bygrave says that hedislikes this obsession with uniqueness. His argument, like Timmons', is that entrepreneurship isabout opportunity recognition, and about putting that opportunity into practice.

But why should such an obsession, which leads to an endeavour to create somethingoutstanding, be negative? Perhaps it is just this desire for uniqueness that creates an opportunity andleads to a particularly powerful innovation.

Let us assume that an entrepreneur, not unlike an artist or a scientist, wants to createsomething extraordinary and unique, something that makes his or her name shine. Naturally theemphasis will be on coming up with an extraordinary idea. Goebel (1990, 87), in his survey of youngentrepreneurs, describes the positive aspects of such an obsession. The idea of doing something thatnobody else has done or thought of, he says, sets free tremendous energies. It makes the personcapable of working hard and effectively under even the most difficult and adverse conditions. Weshould appreciate and utilize such stamina and enthusiasm. Experience tells us that only in reachingout for a piece of utopia can we expect that some innovative parts will still be left by the time ofrealization.

If someone chooses the field of entrepreneurship, instead of art or science, what is wrong withsuch an effort? We should encourage those attempts. Such encouragement will enlarge and enrich thecorps of entrepreneurs. Not least, it will enhance the standard and attractiveness of entrepreneurship insociety.

The concept of opportunity recognition as described by Bygrave and Timmons looks morelike an advanced game for experienced players -- professionals or venture capitalists, familiar with thebest practices in their fields and already connected to relevant groups of potential business partners.For them the concept is a perfect set-up for quickly realising potential and organising the steps intopractice.

In my workshops, I like to invite participants from extremely diverse disciplines. This mixtureopens up a wide spectrum of ideas you can play with. It makes sense to invite people who areconcerned about social and environmental issues, because these participants who are most focussedon societal causes indicate new directions and trends. Include participants who are non-conformistsand outsiders in their field (beware of the dogmatic). It is this mix of people - with clear-cut structureand



methodological inputs from your side - which creates amazingly powerful concepts. As a by-productyou will find an increasing number of participants unwilling to wait for action from political parties,governments, or national initiatives, but who themselves recognize entrepreneurship as a promisingvenue for change.

CONCLUSION

Becoming an entrepreneur is no longer the 'Absonderlichkeit eines Lebenslaufs,' the idiosyncratictwist of one person’s professional development, but a fulfilling career, a career one can plan for, acareer within reach of many more people than might have been imagined.The attempt was undertaken to show that the interplay of several factors: the significance of theentrepreneurial idea, the findings on creativity, chances for the systematic developing of ideas andadapting them to society's values and problems, could set the stage for a larger part of the populationto participate in a more open, more accessible and more widespread culture of innovativeentrepreneurship.

REFERENCES

Berlin Institute of Entrepreneurship. 1999. The Berlin Proposition. Ten propositions to foster theculture of entrepreneurship in German Universities. Berlin. Germany.

Buck, B. 2000. Increasing employability by integrating entrepreneurship in education and training.Paper for the European Training Foundation Advisory Forum. June.

Bygrave, W.D. 1994. The Entrepreneurial Process. In: The Portable MBA in Entrepreneurship. Ed. byW.D. Bygrave.

Casson, M (Ed.).1990. Entrepreneurship. Vermont/USA.Cameron, J. 1995. The Artist´s way. A Spiritual Path to Higher Creativity. New York.Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1999. Das flow-Erlebnis. 7. Auflage. Stuttgart.European Commission. Enterprise Directorate General. 2000. FIT-Project. The Development and

Implementation of European Entrepreneurship Training Curricula. European Union. Brussels.Evans, P. / Wurster, T.S. 2000. Blown to Bits. Boston/USA.Faltin, G. / Zimmer, J. 1996. Reichtum von unten. Berlin.Faltin, G. 1998. Das Netz weiter werfen. In: Faltin/Ripsas/Zimmer (Ed.) Entrepreneurship - Wie aus

Ideen Unternehmen werden. München.Faltin, G. 1999. Competencies for Innovative Entrepreneurship. In: Adult Learning and the Future of

Work. Ed. By Madhu Singh, UNESCO Institute for Education. Hamburg.Gartner, W. and Vesper, K. H. 1999. Entrepreneurship Education 1998. Lloyd Grief Center for

Entrepreneurial Studies. The Anderson School. University of California, Los Angeles.Gelb, M. J. 1998. How to think like Leonardo da Vinci. New York.



Gibb, A. 1999. Can We Build “Effective” Entrepreneurship Through Management Development? In:Journal of General Management. Vol. 24, No. 4.

Gibb, A. 2001a . Creative Destruction, New Values, New Ways of Doing Things and NewCombinations of Knowledge. In pursuit of a new 'Enterprise' and 'Entrepreneurship' Paradigm.Keynote to the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada. London Ontario.

Gibb, A. 2001b. Creative Conducive Environments for Learning and Entrepreneurship. Living with,dealing with creating and enjoying Uncertainty and Complexity. Address to the Conference ofthe Entrepreneurship Forum. Naples

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2000. Executive Report. London: Business SchoolGoebel, P. 1990. Erfolgreiche Jungunternehmer. München.Goleman, D. / Kaufman, P. / Ray, M. 1993. The Creative Spirit. Penguin Books.Hansen, Klaus P. 1992. Die Mentalität des Erwerbs. Erfolgsphilosophien amerikanischer

Unternehmer. Frankfurt/New York.Hay, M. 2000. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Implications for Education. Presentation to

Berlin Institute of Entrepreneurship. Freie Universität Berlin.Hayward, G. 2000. Evaluating Entrepreneurship in Scottish Universities. University of Oxford

Education Department. Oxford. England.Hinterhuber, H. H. 1992. Strategische Unternehmensführung. Berlin/New York.Horx, Matthias 1999. Die acht Sphären der Zukunft. Wien, Hamburg.Horx, Matthias 2001. Smart Capitalism. Frankfurt: EichbornKirzner, I.M. 1987. Unternehmer - Finder von Beruf. In: Wirtschaftswoche 3/87.Kolshorn, R. / Tomecko, J. 1995. Understanding Entrepreneurship and How to Promote It. GTZ /

CEFE International. Eschborn.

Morgan, G. 1991. Emerging Waves and Challenges: The Need for new Competencies and Mindsets.In: Creative Management. Ed. by J. Henry. London, Newbury Park, New Delhi.

Ripsas, S. 1997. Entrepreneurship als ökonomischer Prozeß. Leverkusen.Schumpeter, J. 1993. Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. 8th Edition (unchanged version of the

fourth edition, which was published in 1934). Berlin.Timmons, J. 1994. New Venture Creation. Entrepreneurship in the 1990s. 4th Edition. Boston.

Vesper, K. H. 1993. New Venture Mechanics. New Jersey.Yunus, Muhammad 1998. Grameen. Eine Bank für die Armen der Welt. Bergisch-Gladbach.

creating a culture of innovative entrepreneurship · ultimately, a culture of innovative...

Documents